Established neighbourhoods and consultation

Established neighbourhoods and consultation

Image below from city-commissioned consultant, Merrick (2013) — looking east from Moody Centre towards Inlet Centre
Moody Centre TOD (Merrick)

Have your say on Port Coquitlam housing options
City seeks input on how to densify single family neighbourhoods
Tri City News, July 12, 2016

How do you add more housing to a city without wrecking established neighbourhoods?

That’s the question Port Coquitlam is asking with its Let’s Talk Housing Options survey, aimed at collecting feedback on housing options to allow more people to move to the city.

Through Sept. 19, a guided survey with detailed information will be available at http://www.portcoquitlam.ca/housing as well as community events, including at this Friday’s bike race, where the Cityinfo tent will be part of the PoCo Grand Prix Biz Expo.

“We’ve been hearing more and more that our residents, and people who want to move to Port Coquitlam, are looking for more housing options,” Mayor Greg Moore said in a press release. “The ideas we are putting forward have worked well in other areas, and we’re looking forward to hearing what our community has to say about them.”

Housing options being considered include:

  • coach houses — allowing small accessory dwellings, or laneway housing, on residential lots;
  • smaller lots — expanding opportunities for narrower lots;
  • duplexes — expanding where buildings for two families may be built and ensuring they fit the neighbourhood.

“These proposed changes would provide more options for home buyers, renters, multi-generational households and people with changing housing needs,” said Coun. Brad West, chair of the city’s Smart Growth Committee. “This is one way that we as a city can help ensure our residents can stay in this community.”

Overall, the changes are intended to:

  • provide more housing options for residents to accommodate changing needs;
  • create more housing with ground-level access;
  • ensure new housing fits the neighbourhood character;
  • and make efficient use of infrastructure and accommodate growth in existing neighbourhoods.

As part of the review, the city has looked to address potential impacts on parking, privacy, trees, infrastructure, and services; including continuing to allow secondary suites in single-family homes, but requiring a parking space for them. The report on public input will go to the Smart Growth Committee this fall.

***********************************
Opinion: Affordability crisis: More of the same is not the solution
Vancouver Sun, July 8, 2016
Elizabeth Murphy

For complete article, click on link (title) above.
Excerpts:

Vancouver’s housing affordability crisis is being driven by development speculation and the unchecked flow of foreign capital. But rather than deal with these real issues, the crisis is being falsely framed as a lack of housing supply. In fact, rezonings for increased density inflates land values, which is a big part of the problem.
[…]
All along the Cambie Corridor there have been significant increases in development potential. This has resulted in land speculation and assemblies for condo development. Mostly six to 10 storeys, with 32 storeys at Marine and 45 storeys at Oakridge. Even though the Canada Line was at peak hour capacity from the day it opened in 2010, new rezonings continue to be approved. Land and unit values continue to escalate despite increased supply while transportation and amenities are diminished and cannot keep up with increased needs.
[…]
There now is no such thing as “single-family” zoning in Vancouver. Most every lot can have three units: the main dwelling, a secondary suite, and a laneway house. But rather than using these as an incentive to retain and upgrade solid older homes, they are leading to more demolition, waste and inflation.
[…]
Simple supply and demand economics are no longer working. Tying transit funding to increased density, as has been promoted by industry, would only make things worse. Communities should be given more influence in land-use decisions, not handicapped with less consultation and input.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s